a

GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to the Committee on 

Appropriations, House of 

Representatives

May 2003 TRANSPORTATION 

RESEARCH

Actions Needed to 

Improve Coordination 

and Evaluation of 

Research

GAO-03-500
RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements pertaining 

to the coordination of departmental research efforts. For example, while 

RSPA develops an annual plan and meets monthly with other DOT research 

officials, RSPA does not review the status of all DOT research activities. 

Thus, it cannot determine whether duplication of research efforts within 

DOT does or does not occur. Additionally, RSPA has not developed 

standards against which to measure its performance in coordinating 

research within DOT. Moreover, RSPA has not fully met all legislative and 

DOT requirements to measure research results and oversee research 

evaluations across DOT. RSPA officials cited a lack of ready information on 

DOT research activities budget constraints and a lack of authority over other 

DOT agencies as reasons why they served primarily an information-sharing 

role, rather than as an overseer and manager of the coordination and 

evaluation processes. 

Extent to Which RSPA Meets Coordination and Evaluation Requirements 

Since 1999, RSPA has budgeted $37 million to conduct four major research 

programs with applicability to more than one mode of transportation—for 

example, using technology to improve energy efficiency and reduce 

emissions and transportation dependence on petroleum. According to the 

Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education, RSPA’s 

current multimodal research programs are scheduled for completion by the 

end of fiscal year 2004 and have had a variety of positive results. However, 

RSPA does not have an evaluation process to systematically evaluate the 

results of its multimodal research programs. 

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

Actions Needed to Improve Coordination 

and Evaluation of Research 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-500 

To view the full report, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Kate Siggerud 

at (202) 512-2834 or siggerudk@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-03-500, a report to the 

Committee on Appropriations, House of 

Representatives 

May 2003 

The Research and Special 

Programs Administration (RSPA) 

within the Department of 

Transportation (DOT) is 

responsible for coordinating and 

ensuring the evaluation of DOT 

research programs to promote the 

efficient use of departmental 

research funds, which in fiscal year 

2002 totaled over $1 billion. RSPA 

is also responsible for conducting 

multimodal research that cuts 

across different modes of 

transportation. The House 

Committee on Appropriations 

directed GAO to examine RSPA’s 

coordination and evaluation of 

research within DOT and the status 

of its own multimodal research. 

 

GAO is recommending that DOT 

and RSPA develop strategies to 

identify potential research 

duplication and ensure that the 

results of all DOT transportation 

research activities—including 

those conducted by RSPA—are 

evaluated. Further, GAO 

recommended that RSPA assess 

the effectiveness of its research 

coordination efforts by developing 

appropriate performance measures. 

DOT reviewed a draft of this report 

and generally agreed with its 

contents but did not comment on 

the report’s recommendations. 
Page i GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 5

RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements 

for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts 6

RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements 

to Evaluate DOT Research 16

RSPA Has Conducted Multimodal Research in Four Areas but Does 

Not Have a Process to Systematically Evaluate Program 

Results 19

Conclusions 32

Recommendations for Executive Action 32

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 33

Appendixes

Appendix I: Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four 

Multimodal Programs Conducted by RSPA 35

Tables Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research 

Programs Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 

2003 21

Table 2: Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program 35

Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information 

Technologies Program 38

Table 4: Human-Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management 

Program 40

Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program 41

Figures Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and 

DOT Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research 

Efforts 7

Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development 

Planning and Management Activities (Fiscal Years 

1999-2003) 12

Figure 3: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and 

DOT Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research 

Efforts 16

Figure 4: Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station 22
Contents

Page ii GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 5: Satellite-based Photographic Image of U.S. Interstates 25 

and 40 in Albuquerque, New Mexico 24

Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in Fatigue Research 25

Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite 27

Figure 8: RSPA’s Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years 

1999-2003) 29

Abbreviations

DOT Department of Transportation

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

FRA Federal Railroad Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act of 1993

MARAD Maritime Administration

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration

TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

TRB Transportation Research Board

TSA Transportation Security Administration

USCG United States Coast Guard

This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. 

Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce 

copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product.
Page 1 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

May 1, 2003 Letr

The Honorable C.W. Bill Young

Chairman

The Honorable David R. Obey

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

In fiscal year 2002, the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) research and 

development budget totaled more than $1 billion. This sum supported the 

many individual projects undertaken by the Federal Highway 

Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the other 

operating administrations that constitute DOT. This research is vital to 

meeting the department’s key transportation priorities, such as increasing 

transportation safety, enhancing mobility for all Americans, supporting the 

nation’s economic growth, and protecting the environment. The Congress 

has recognized the importance of coordinating and evaluating research 

throughout DOT and established requirements in the Transportation Equity 

Act for the 21st Century to ensure that those tasks are accomplished. In 

turn, the department has given responsibility to the Research and Special 

Programs Administration’s Office of Innovation, Research, and Education 

(hereafter referred to as RSPA) for coordinating, and ensuring the 

evaluation of, DOT research programs to promote the efficient use of 

research funds. RSPA is additionally responsible for conducting 

multimodal research—research that applies to more than one mode of 

transportation—for the department that contributes to the safe, effective, 

and efficient transportation of people and goods. 

In House Report 107-722, accompanying the DOT and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2003, the House Committee on 

Appropriations, directed us to examine RSPA’s role in coordinating 

research activities and conducting multimodal research throughout the 

department. Specifically, in subsequent discussions with Committee staff, 

we agreed to address the following questions: (1) To what extent has RSPA 

fulfilled requirements for coordinating DOT research efforts? (2) To what 

extent has RSPA fulfilled requirements for evaluating research within DOT? 

and (3) What types of multimodal research has RSPA conducted since 1999, 

and what have been the results? 

To address questions regarding RSPA’s efforts to coordinate and evaluate 

the department’s research efforts, we examined pertinent legislation, DOT 
Page 2 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

policy guidance, and DOT performance reports and plans as well as reports 

and documents provided by RSPA, including the department’s Research, 

Development, and Technology Plan. Although we did not review the 

individual research programs and agendas of each DOT modal 

administration, we reviewed external assessments conducted by us and the 

National Research Council’s Transportation Research Board regarding 

RSPA’s role and efforts in coordinating DOT research.1

 Further, we 

interviewed RSPA officials, including RSPA’s Associate Administrator for 

Innovation, Research, and Education (hereafter Associate Administrator); 

officials from the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center in 

Cambridge, Massachusetts; and all of the members of the department’s 

Research and Technology Coordinating Council (hereafter Coordinating 

Council), to discuss research coordination efforts and identify potential 

improvements. At the time of our review, the council was made up of 15 

members representing the department’s Office of the Assistant Secretary 

for Transportation Policy, Office of Intelligence and Security, Office of the 

Assistant Secretary for Budget, Office of Intermodalism, United States 

Coast Guard, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway 

Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Maritime 

Administration, RSPA, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, and Transportation Security 

Administration.2

 In addition, to determine the types and status of 

multimodal research that RSPA conducted, we (1) reviewed and analyzed 

RSPA budget data from fiscal years 1999 through 2003 and (2) reviewed 

RSPA’s multimodal project plans agreements and published project results 

for the same period. (One of RSPA’s multimodal research programs—the 

Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program—is also the subject of a 

separate GAO review.)3

 

1

The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National Research Council, a private, 

nonprofit institution that is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of 

Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The board’s mission is to promote 

innovation and progress in transportation by motivating and conducting research, 

facilitating the dissemination of information, and encouraging the implementation of 

research results. 

2

The U.S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration were transferred to 

the Department of Homeland Security in March 2003.

3

U.S. General Accounting Office, Transportation Security Research: Coordination Needed 

in Selecting and Implementing Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessments, GAO-03-502

(Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003). 
Page 3 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

We conducted our review from September 2002 through February 2003 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements for 

coordinating departmental research efforts. To meet the requirements of 

the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, RSPA developed an 

annual surface transportation research and development plan and holds 

monthly meetings of the department’s Research and Technology 

Coordinating Council to coordinate surface transportation research and 

technology development activities. The council also provides a venue for 

discussing research processes, procedures, and policies as well as a forum 

for networking among the department’s researchers to meet DOT 

requirements for routinely sharing research information. However, RSPA 

has not met all of its legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating 

ongoing research efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort because 

it does not review all DOT research projects. According to RSPA’s 

Associate Administrator, RSPA has not reviewed all DOT research projects 

to identify unnecessary duplication because (1) RSPA does not have ready 

access to information on all research activities across the department 

because efforts to implement a DOT-wide computer-based research 

tracking system have stalled and (2) staff and resources dedicated to 

research coordination activities have declined. The Associate 

Administrator said that he did not believe that unnecessary duplication of 

research projects occurred, and that even if such duplication were 

identified, RSPA’s limited authority within DOT would hinder efforts to 

eliminate that duplication. 
Page 4 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements for 

evaluating research within DOT. The Secretary of Transportation delegated 

responsibility to RSPA for measuring the results of federal surface 

transportation research—a legislative requirement—and overseeing and 

developing ways to improve research evaluations throughout the 

department, which is a DOT requirement. Of these requirements, RSPA 

partially meets one: it oversees research evaluation by discussing the issue 

at Coordinating Council meetings. According to RSPA officials, they do not 

measure the results of surface transportation research throughout DOT 

because the operating administrations perform their own evaluations and 

RSPA lacks the resources needed to review the individual research 

evaluation efforts of each of the operating administrations. Because RSPA 

does not oversee specific research evaluation efforts, it cannot ensure that 

evaluations are being conducted or assess the quality of DOT’s operating 

administrations’ evaluations. Neither RSPA nor DOT has developed a 

strategy to address the resource limitations cited by RSPA officials, and our 

previous work indicates that more specific oversight is warranted. For 

example, we have previously reported that the Federal Highway 

Administration does not have an agencywide systematic process to 

evaluate whether its research projects are achieving intended results and 

does not generally use a peer review approach,4

 consistent with federal 

research best practices.5

 

Since 1999, RSPA has conducted multimodal research in the following four 

areas: using technology to improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions, 

and reduce transportation dependence on petroleum; using satellite images 

to improve transportation safety and disaster planning; developing more 

effective means to reduce the fatigue of drivers and pilots; and assessing 

key transportation systems’ vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or 

terrorist threats. RSPA budgeted about $37 million to conduct these four 

multimodal research programs from fiscal years 1999 through 2003. 

According to RSPA’s Associate Administrator, all four programs have 

resulted or will result in significant contributions and improvements to the 

transportation industry. For example, he said that research aimed at 

advanced vehicle technologies has resulted in the testing and development 

4

Peer review is a process that includes an independent assessment of the technical and 

scientific merit or quality of research by peers with essential subject area expertise and 

perspective equal to that of the researchers.

5

U.S. General Accounting Office, Highway Research: Systematic Selection and Evaluation 

Processes Needed for Research Program, GAO-02-573 (Washington, D.C.: May 24, 2002).
Page 5 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

of components currently used in the production of commercially available 

hybrid electrical vehicles. RSPA officials said they use expert or peer

review to assess their multimodal research process and status of their 

research programs, an approach that is widely recognized as a research 

evaluation best practice. However, we found that RSPA has not established 

a systematic approach for using peer or expert review to evaluate the 

results of all of its multimodal research programs. For example, RSPA has 

no plans to evaluate the results of its Transportation Infrastructure 

Assurance Program. As a result, RSPA is limited in its ability to determine 

the extent to which these programs are achieving their intended goals. 

This report contains recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation 

and the Administrator of RSPA for actions to improve RSPA’s ability to 

meet its legislative and DOT requirements pertaining to research 

coordination and evaluation. In commenting on this draft, DOT officials 

generally agreed with our findings and provided technical comments that 

we incorporated, as appropriate. They did not comment on the report’s 

recommendations.

Background RSPA has both legislative and departmental responsibilities for 

coordinating and evaluating DOT’s research and development programs, 

which, in fiscal year 2002, amounted to about $1 billion. The Transportation 

Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21)6

 made DOT responsible for 

establishing a strategic plan for surface transportation research. The plan is 

to include a discussion of efforts to coordinate federal surface 

transportation research and technology development activities to avoid 

unnecessary duplication of effort. It also is to contain a description of 

program evaluations and a schedule for future evaluations of DOT research 

projects, among other things. DOT policy delegates the responsibility for 

meeting this and other legislative mandates related to research and 

development activities to RSPA’s Associate Administrator as chair of the 

department’s Coordinating Council. Moreover, DOT policy requires RSPA’s 

Associate Administrator, through the Coordinating Council, to coordinate 

all research activities by developing processes for sharing information 

about research and technology and reviewing the status of all research and 

technology projects throughout DOT. 

6

Section 5108 codified at 23 U.S.C. § 508.
Page 6 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA’s Office of Innovation, Research, and Education had nine full-time 

employees and a budget of about $560,000 for fiscal year 2003. In addition 

to coordination and evaluation duties, RSPA manages and supports a 

variety of other programs for the department, including its Technology 

Transfer and Technology Sharing Programs, Small Business Innovation 

Research Program, and University Transportation Centers Program.7

 RSPA 

also conducts research on multimodal issues that affect the U.S. 

transportation system as a whole in contrast to the other operating 

administrations within DOT that focus on specific sectors of the U.S. 

transportation system.8

 In fiscal year 2003, RSPA conducted and managed 

four major multimodal research programs. Participants in RSPA’s 

multimodal research programs include stakeholders from the departments’ 

operating administrations; other federal departments and agencies; state 

departments of transportation; private and state universities; private-sector 

partners; and various consortia.9

 (See app. I for a listing of project 

stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA’s multimodal research 

programs.) 

RSPA Has Met Some, 

but Not All, Legislative 

or DOT Requirements 

for Coordinating DOT 

Research Efforts

Although RSPA has developed an annual plan and taken other steps to 

facilitate research coordination, it has not fully met legislative and DOT 

requirements for coordinating departmental research. Figure 1 summarizes 

these requirements and the extent to which RSPA has met them. 

7

Through the University Transportation Centers Program, DOT supports 33 university-based 

research centers to advance transportation research and education. In fiscal year 2003, 

RSPA received almost $30 million in reimbursable funds from the Federal Highway 

Administration and the Federal Transit Administration to manage the program. 

8

Operating administrations include the Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway 

Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Federal Railroad 

Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Maritime Administration, and National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

9

A consortium focuses on research and development of products in a priority area and 

includes technical application and demonstration projects carried out in partnership with 

industries and service providers.
Page 7 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts

RSPA Facilitates Research 

Coordination by Developing 

an Annual Plan and 

Conducting Monthly 

Meetings 

RSPA has met its legislative requirement under TEA-21 to develop an 

annual surface transportation research and technology development plan 

to coordinate and document research efforts. The plan covers not only 

surface transportation but also air and maritime. Now in its fourth edition, 

the plan discusses state and local transportation research activities; 

describes each operating administration’s mission; and conveys priorities 

for the department’s research activities, including identifying examples of 

research programs that are necessary to achieve the department’s strategic 

goals. According to the Associate Administrator, the plan is an important 

resource for the department’s budget and program deployment processes 

and helps to avoid unnecessary duplication of research among the 

operating administrations. In March 2000, the National Research Council, 

acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB), assessed DOT’s 

strategic planning process, including the first edition of its research plan, 

and generally commended RSPA’s efforts in coordinating the department’s
Page 8 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

research activities.10 In September 2001, we reported that the department’s 

research plan achieved a number of important strategic functions, 

including supporting the department's budget and program development 

process, conveying priorities, linking research and development initiatives 

occurring throughout the department to specific strategic goals, and 

focusing on research and technology needs that concern the department as 

a whole.11 However, upon reviewing the fiscal year 2003 research plan, we 

found that it does not summarize results of the previous year’s surface 

transportation research programs. Such a summary is also absent from the 

department’s overall performance plan and reports, where it is required by 

TEA-21.12 Since the explicit intent of the research plan is to focus the 

department’s research efforts, and the department is required to gather 

summary information on the previous years’ research results, this 

information could provide continuity and context for observations about 

planned research for future years. 

The research plan is the culmination of monthly Coordinating Council 

meetings in which the Associate Administrator meets with members from 

each of DOT’s operating administrations as well as representatives from 

DOT’s Office of Policy, Office of Budget, Office of Intelligence and Security, 

and Office of Intermodalism. These meetings also serve as a means to fulfill 

the legislative requirement to coordinate surface transportation research 

and technology development and the DOT requirement to coordinate 

research across all modes within DOT. Agendas and minutes from these 

meetings indicate that the Coordinating Council’s discussions involve 

research processes, procedures, policy,13 and presentations from council 

10TRB study conducted by the Committee for Review of the National Transportation Science 

and Technology Strategy (Washington D.C.: Mar. 28, 2000) 3.

11U.S. General Accounting Office, Combating Terrorism: Selected Challenges and Related 

Recommendations, GAO-01-882 (Washington D.C.: Sept. 20, 2001) 85.

12According to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, each federal 

department is required to submit a performance plan to the Congress annually. The TEA-21 

requirement to include results of the year’s research in the department’s annual 

performance plan is at 23 U.S.C. § 508 (c) (4) (A). 

13For example, in October 2002, the Coordinating Council was delegated responsibility for 

coordination of all actions related to research misconduct, including providing guidance in 

research misconduct policy implementation. The federal policy on research misconduct 

was released in December 2000 by the Executive Office of the President’s Office of Science 

and Technology Policy and directs all federal agencies that conduct or support research to 

implement this policy. In addition, the council is revising DOT Order 1700.18B dealing with 

acquisition, publication, and dissemination of DOT scientific and technical reports. 
Page 9 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

members and guest speakers. According to the Associate Administrator, 

these meetings further provide a forum for networking among DOT 

researchers, a venue for DOT operating administrations to learn about each 

other’s research, and an opportunity for information sharing and 

technology transfer. In addition, in instances where research has 

multimodal applicability, the Associate Administrator said RSPA staff and 

representatives from the other operating administrations have been active 

in sharing information through working groups, such as the Human Factors 

Coordinating Committee, which shares information on research conducted 

by each of the operating administrations focusing on identifying ways to 

better manage human operator fatigue.

RSPA Has Not Reviewed All 

DOT Research Projects to 

Identify Unnecessary 

Duplication 

RSPA does not fully meet its legislative requirement to coordinate surface 

transportation and technology development activities because it does not 

review all surface transportation research projects to determine whether 

surface transportation researchers within DOT are unnecessarily 

duplicating research efforts. A similar DOT requirement broadens this 

responsibility to make RSPA responsible for reviewing the status of all 

research projects throughout DOT for the same purpose. In its March 2000 

report, TRB reported the absence of information on the current status of all 

DOT research programs in the department’s annual research plan.14 We 

discovered that this information also remained absent from DOT’s fiscal 

year 2003 research plan. The Associate Administrator said that RSPA 

lacked (1) readily accessible data on the research activities of other parts 

of DOT and (2) the staff and resources to review all research projects 

across the department to, at a minimum, identify and report on the extent 

of unnecessary duplication, if any, across the department. He also said that 

even if RSPA reviewed all of the department’s research activities and 

identified any unnecessary duplication of effort, RSPA does not have the 

program and budget authority to direct changes in other operating 

administrations’ research activities. 

14 TRB study, 13.
Page 10 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA’s Associate Administrator explained that RSPA does not have readily 

accessible data on the research activities of other parts of DOT because 

efforts to develop a computer-based tracking system to share DOT research 

program and budget information have stalled. RSPA’s 1998 strategic plan 

discussed the need to create and deploy such a system to meet its strategic 

goal for coordinating research and technology. In fiscal year 1999, RSPA 

planned to allocate $200,000 annually for 4 years to develop and implement 

a system. According to the Associate Administrator, as of January 2003, 

RSPA had spent about $500,000 of its allocation and completed 

development of a prototype database. He said that implementing the 

centralized information system would (1) make basic project information 

(such as project methodologies, funding levels and sources, schedules, and 

planned products) across the department more accessible; (2) provide 

greater levels of organization and clarity on historical research; (3) 

facilitate strategic planning and coordination; and (4) improve the 

department’s annual research plan by providing decision-makers with more 

complete, accurate, and timely information on all DOT research activities. 

According to the Associate Administrator and Coordinating Council 

members, some operating administrations do not support implementation 

of the system because they believe that the system would put additional 

demands on limited resources and would produce little in terms of tangible 

results. Coordinating Council members also said it would duplicate 

existing information systems already in place at some operating 

administrations and the new system would not be integrated into their 

other, modal-unique information systems (such as budget and accounting 

information systems). According to the RSPA official in charge of 

developing the database, each operating administration would require up 

to approximately 2 full-time employees for up to 1 year to input the 

historical research project data going back 5 years, and an additional 1⁄2 to 1 

full-time employees per year to manage and update the database. 
Page 11 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

The Associate Administrator also said that RSPA did not review the status 

of all operating administrations’ research projects to identify any 

unnecessary duplication because his office lacks sufficient staff and 

resources to do so. He noted, for example, that RSPA’s total research and 

technology budget for fiscal year 1999 was about $3.7 million—of which 

$2.2 million was allocated for research and development planning and 

management activities15—and 13 full-time employees. However, in fiscal 

year 2003, this decreased to a total budget of about $2.9 million—of which 

$560,000 was allocated for research and development planning and 

management activities—and 9 full-time employees. The Associate 

Administrator said that the decline in RSPA’s staff and resources—the only 

such staff and resources in the department for conducting long-term 

transportation research planning and coordinating research plans and 

programs—has also severely limited RSPA’s efforts to coordinate with 

transportation research stakeholders outside of DOT, such as state, local, 

and other federal agencies. Figure 2 shows RSPA’s funding levels for its 

research and development planning and management activities from fiscal 

years 1999 through 2003. 

15According to RSPA, research and development planning and management includes funding 

for transportation research and development strategic planning, DOT research facilitation, 

coordination and partnerships, DOT technology transfer and technology sharing programs, 

National Science and Technology Council activities, Small Business Innovation Research 

Program support, and international research and development activities. 
Page 12 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development Planning and 

Management Activities (Fiscal Years 1999-2003)

RSPA’s Associate Administrator said he believes that little or no duplication 

of research activities occurs. He said that, because the monthly 

Coordinating Council meetings provided a forum for discussing ongoing 

and planned research, unnecessary duplication of research efforts would 

be identified. Also, he said that most DOT operating administrations have 

discrete research programs and budgets that support their mode-specific 

regulatory and safety mandates. For example, the Federal Highway 

Administration research focuses on public roads and highways, and its 

primary users are state and local transportation departments that seek 

better ways to repair the public infrastructure and find improved materials 

for pavements. Similarly, the Federal Railroad Administration focuses on 

the rail industry’s privately owned infrastructure and these owners—freight 

railroads, Amtrak, commuter railroads, and shippers—look to Federal 

Railroad Administration to conduct research that will reduce track failure, 

equipment failure, and human error. 

According to members of the Coordinating Council, apparent duplication 

in research programs might reflect a number of conditions—for example, 

research that was intended to validate previous research results, expand 

research applications, and address different needs (such as pavement 
Page 13 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

research for airport runways and highways)—or an effort to explore 

alternative approaches before selecting one for further development. None 

of the council members, however, could provide us with specific examples 

of research projects that reflected these conditions. 

Other Coordinating Council members with whom we spoke, however, said 

that the council should take further steps to more effectively coordinate 

DOT research. For example, one member said the Coordinating Council 

should review all of the current projects across the department to improve 

the level and quality of the department’s research coordination efforts. 

Another member said that the primary functions of the Coordinating 

Council should be to universally review DOT research projects to eliminate 

unnecessary duplication of effort and to provide opportunities for joint 

research partnerships on similar work. Such opportunities might include 

research focusing on safety, environmental, training, and human factor 

issues. However, Coordinating Council members said that DOT support for 

the council and research coordination in general had declined in recent 

years (e.g., lower ranking members of the operating administrations attend 

the meetings, instead of the more senior personnel that had once attended, 

and meetings were shortened from 2 hours to 1 hour per month), and that 

greater departmental support for this effort was warranted.

The Associate Administrator said that RSPA did not have the program and 

budget authority over the department’s operating administrations’ research 

activities to direct changes in research programs, even if opportunities for 

greater joint efforts or elimination of unnecessary duplicative research 

were found. In a 1996 report examining the status of the department’s 

coordination of surface transportation research, we identified RSPA’s lack 

of internal clout within the department as an obstacle to its ability to 

function effectively as its research strategic planner because it had no 

direct program or budget authority over the department’s operating 

administrations’ research activities.16 Although DOT proposed the creation 

of such an organization to have budgeting and program authority for DOT 

research in its fiscal year 1996 budget submission, the Congress did not 

approve the agency’s proposal. According to the Associate Administrator, 

there are no current legislative or budget initiatives to pursue this proposal. 

16U.S. General Accounting Office, Surface Transportation: Research Funding, Federal 

Role, and Emerging Issues, RCED-96-233 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 6, 1996). 
Page 14 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Although DOT’s earlier effort to overcome RSPA’s lack of internal authority 

was not implemented, neither the department nor RSPA has developed 

alternative approaches to overcome this obstacle as well as to address the 

information and resource limitations that continue to hinder RSPA’s efforts 

to meet legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating departmental 

research. Developing a strategy that incorporates information about the 

costs involved in reviewing research projects throughout DOT to ensure 

that unnecessary duplication does not occur, and that determines whether 

finalizing the development and implementation of the DOT-wide research 

tracking system database could serve this purpose, is an important first 

step for RSPA to meet the legislative and DOT requirements entrusted to it. 

A strategy is also critical for communicating to the Congress and the 

Secretary of Transportation the challenges RSPA faces, and the specific 

actions it can take, in meeting the requirements with the resources it 

possesses. 

RSPA Has Not Developed 

Performance Standards 

Against Which to Measure 

Its Coordination Efforts 

RSPA has not established performance measures to systematically 

document the results and benefits of coordinating DOT research 

activities.17 In the absence of systematically gathered data on research 

activities across the department and associated performance measures, it 

is difficult to determine RSPA’s overall success in coordinating DOT’s 

billion-dollar research program. Demonstrated successes could garner 

greater departmental support for RSPA’s research coordination efforts. In 

its fiscal year 2003 budget submission, RSPA cited the difficulty in defining 

and measuring the effectiveness of research coordination activities. 

According to RSPA, it is because of this difficulty that it relies upon 

external program assessments to provide independent evaluation of its 

research and coordination activities.18

17In RSPA’s fiscal year 2003 budget submission to the Congress, it reported one quantifiable 

performance measure. This measure is aimed at gauging RSPA’s progress in administrating 

the University Transportation Centers Program and focuses on the number of students 

graduating with advanced degrees from universities funded under the program. For fiscal 

year 2003, RSPA’s performance goal is 1,228 students. 

18TRB conducted such an assessment in March 2000.
Page 15 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Although we support the use of external assessments, we have reported 

that quantifiable measures are necessary to assess agency performance to 

meet the intent of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 

(GPRA).19 Among the stated purposes of GPRA is the improvement of 

federal program effectiveness and public accountability. For agencies to 

successfully become high-performing organizations, their leaders need to 

foster performance-based cultures, find ways to measure performance, and 

use performance information to make decisions. A fundamental element in 

an organization’s efforts to manage for results is its ability to set meaningful 

goals for performance and, using performance information, measure 

performance against those goals. High-performing, results-oriented 

organizations establish a set of measures to gauge progress over various 

dimensions of performance. 

In crafting GPRA, the Congress expressed its interest in American 

taxpayers’ getting quality results from the programs they pay for as well as 

its concern about waste and inefficiency in federal programs. The 

fundamental reason for collecting information on a program’s performance 

is to take action in managing the program on the basis of that information. 

By using performance information to assess the way a program is 

conducted, managers can consider alternative approaches and processes in 

areas where goals are not being met and enhance the use of program 

approaches and processes that are working well. Performance information 

also allows program managers to compare their programs’ results with 

goals and thus determine where to target program resources to improve 

performance. When managers are forced to reduce their resources, the 

same analysis can help them target the reductions to minimize the impact 

on program results.

GPRA’s emphasis on results implies that federal programs contributing to 

the same or similar outcomes should be closely coordinated to ensure that 

goals are consistent and complementary, and that program efforts are 

mutually reinforcing. Thus, measuring the effectiveness of RSPA’s 

coordination of DOT research is a critical element of fulfilling its legislative 

and departmental coordination responsibilities—an element RSPA has not 

yet addressed.

19GPRA requires federal agencies to set strategic goals and establish performance measures 

for management.
Page 16 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA Has Met Some, 

but Not All, Legislative 

or DOT Requirements 

to Evaluate DOT 

Research

RSPA has not fully met all legislative and DOT requirements for evaluating 

research within the department. RSPA does not meet a legislative 

requirement for measuring the results of federal surface transportation 

research and partially meets a related DOT policy requirement to oversee 

and develop ways to improve research evaluations throughout the 

department. Figure 3 summarizes these requirements and the extent to 

which RSPA has met them. 

Figure 3: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research Efforts
Page 17 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Although the department has delegated to RSPA the responsibility for 

meeting legislative and DOT requirements for evaluating research projects 

throughout the department, RSPA’s oversight of DOT research evaluation is 

limited to facilitating exchange of information on evaluation approaches. 

As delegated by the Secretary of Transportation, RSPA is responsible for 

measuring the results of federal surface transportation research activities 

and how these results impact the performance of the surface 

transportation systems of the United States, as stated in TEA-21.20 Also, 

TEA-21 calls for a strategic planning process21 that includes information on 

research program evaluations conducted and a schedule of future 

evaluations.

22 RSPA has not taken steps to meet these legislative 

responsibilities for measuring the results of DOT surface transportation 

research, describing research program evaluations, and establishing a 

schedule for future evaluations.23 

In terms of DOT policy, RSPA is responsible for overseeing and developing 

more efficient, effective, and participative ways to evaluate and measure 

research program effectiveness and progress across all operating 

administrations.24 RSPA has taken steps to develop and communicate more 

effective means of evaluation by discussing this issue at monthly 

Coordinating Council meetings. For example, in October 2002, the council 

provided a forum for discussing four different agency approaches to 

research evaluation. In addition, according to RPSA officials, the council 

has discussed criteria established by the Office of Management and Budget 

for federal investment in research and how these criteria can have an 

impact on performance evaluation. RSPA, however, does not oversee 

operating administrations’ research evaluation efforts and therefore cannot 

ensure that steps are being consistently taken to improve evaluation 

approaches. 

2023 U.S.C. § 508 (a) (3) and (b) (3). 

21As defined at 5 U.S.C. § 306.

2223 U.S.C. § 508 (a) (1). 

23We noted that the department’s performance plan for fiscal year 2003 contained an 

appendix detailing DOT program evaluation methods, results, and schedule for future 

evaluations for programs that represent significant DOT activities (other than research) that 

contribute to its strategic goals. 

24DOT Order 1120.39.
Page 18 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

The Associate Administrator said that RSPA does not measure the results 

of federal transportation research activities or provide oversight of the 

operating administrations’ research program evaluation processes for the 

following two reasons: (1) the operating administrations have 

responsibility for performing and measuring their own research programs 

and (2) the resource constraints that have limited RSPA’s ability to 

coordinate DOT-wide research also limit the agency’s ability to oversee 

research program evaluations across the department. 

Coordinating Council members said that increased oversight of DOT-wide 

research programs would be beneficial. Our previous work examining 

DOT’s research activities also indicates that such oversight is 

warranted. For example, in reviewing the Federal Highway 

Administration’s research program, which accounts for almost half of 

DOT’s research budget, we found that the Federal Highway Administration 

lacked a systematic process for conducting research evaluations, and that 

the processes it used were not always consistent with federal research best 

practices because it generally did not use a peer review approach.25 Thus, 

without oversight, RSPA and the department have no assurance that, at a 

minimum, operating administration research programs are routinely 

evaluated or that approaches to evaluations are consistent with established 

best practices. 

DOT and RSPA also have not developed a strategy to meet the requirement 

to measure the results of federal transportation research activities and how 

they impact the performance of the surface transportation systems of the 

United States. Developing such a strategy that incorporates information 

about the costs involved in ensuring that evaluations are completed and 

performed according to best practices is an important first step for DOT 

and RSPA to meet the requirement. A strategy also is critical for 

communicating to the Congress and the Secretary of Transportation (1) the 

challenges that RSPA and the department face and (2) the specific actions 

that can be taken to meet this requirement given available resources. After 

we raised these issues to senior RSPA officials as a result of our review, 

they developed a proposed model for reorganizing the Coordinating 

Council to provide an opportunity for RSPA to meet legislative and 

departmental requirements to oversee DOT research evaluation. They said 

they were still considering the proposal when we completed our review. 

25GAO-02-573.
Page 19 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA Has Conducted 

Multimodal Research 

in Four Areas but Does 

Not Have a Process to 

Systematically 

Evaluate Program 

Results 

Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research programs—

advanced vehicle technologies, commercial remote sensing and spatial 

information, operator fatigue management, and transportation 

infrastructure assurance. According to RSPA’s Associate Administrator, 

these four programs have resulted or will result in significant contributions 

and improvements to the transportation industry. For example, he said that 

research aimed at advanced vehicle technologies has resulted in the testing 

and development of components currently used in the production of 

commercially available hybrid electrical vehicles. Nonetheless, RSPA does 

not have a process to systematically evaluate the results of all its 

multimodal research programs. In the absence of such a process, RSPA 

manages its multimodal research programs by monitoring research 

contract agreements and using expert or peer review panels to assess the 

quality and relevance of ongoing research. By not systematically evaluating 

program results, however, RSPA is limited in its ability to determine the 

extent to which its multimodal research programs are achieving their 

intended goals. 

Status of RSPA’s Multimodal 

Research Programs 

Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research programs, of 

which two were congressionally mandated. Specifically, TEA-21 required 

DOT to conduct research on using (1) technology to improve energy 

efficiency, and reduce emissions and transportation dependence on 

petroleum, and (2) satellite images to improve transportation safety and 

disaster planning. Transportation research experts within DOT developed a 

third RSPA research program to develop more effective means to increase 

the endurance and reduce fatigue of drivers and pilots. Finally, the catalyst 

for research in a fourth area that assesses key transportation system 

vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or terrorist threats came from the 

National Research Council’s TRB.26 

26TRB, Improving Surface Transportation Security, A Research and Development Strategy

(1999).
Page 20 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA identified and selected 

individual projects for these multimodal research programs by obtaining 

input from experts within and outside DOT. For example, RSPA, in 

conjunction with other DOT operating administrations, published a plan in 

June 1999 to guide the selection of human fatique-related projects. In 

addition, in April 2000, RSPA issued a strategic multimodal research and 

development program plan to help focus advanced vehicle technology 

research. Also, in December 2000, RSPA and TRB held a conference on 

remote sensing and spatial information research to, among other things, 

discuss and define issues and possible research needs with representatives 

from academia, transportation agencies, remote sensing businesses, 

consulting firms, and other groups.27 (See app. I for a list of project 

stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA’s multimodal research 

programs.) Table 1 provides summary data concerning the scope, funding, 

and status of RSPA’s four multimodal research programs. 

27See GAO-03-502 for a discussion of the coordination issues involved in developing and 

implementing RSPA’s Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program.
Page 21 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research Programs Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003

Source: GAO presentation of RSPA data.

• The Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program was mandated in 1998 

under section 5111 of TEA-21. This program combines transportation 

technologies and innovative program elements to produce new vehicles, 

components, and infrastructure for medium- and heavy-duty 

transportation needs. Since 1999, approximately $15 million has been 

allocated toward 55 separate research projects, 43 of which have been 

Dollars in thousands 

Multimodal research

program

Reasons for initiating 

programs

Fiscal

year

Direct and

reimbursable

funding

Number of 

projects

initiated

Program status as of 

January 14, 2003

Advanced Vehicle 

Technologies Program

TEA-21, section 5111 1999 $9,908 21 In process: 12 of 55 

projects still ongoing—

planned program 

completion, end of 2004. 

2000 5,000 15

2001 0 11

2002 0 8

2003 0 0

Total $14,908 55

Commercial Remote 

Sensing and Spatial 

Information Technologies 

Program

TEA-21, section 5113 1999 $4,000 0 In process: 14 of 18 

projects still ongoing—

planned program 

completion, end of 2003. 

2000 6,000 9

2001 8,000 6

2002 0 3

2003 0 0

Total $18,000 18

Human Centered 

Systems: Operator Fatigue 

Management Program

Generated by research 

experts within DOT

1999 $750 0 In process: 2 of 4 projects 

still ongoing—planned 

program completion, end of 

2004.

2000 0 4

2001 300 0

2002 0 0

2003 0 0

Total $1,050 4

Transportation 

Infrastructure Assurance 

Program

Identified in TRB’s 

Improving Surface 

Transportation Security, A 

Research and 

Development Strategy 

(1999). 

1999 0 0 In process: all 4 of the 

projects still ongoing—

planned program 

completion, end of 2003.

2000 0 0

2001 $1,000 2

2002 1,000 2

2003 1,000 0

Total $3,000 4
Page 22 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

completed, with the goal of improving energy efficiency and U.S. 

competitiveness while reducing emissions and transportation 

dependence on petroleum. According to the Associate Administrator, 

the program has resulted in (1) the testing of components that are being 

used in the development and production of commercially available 

hybrid electrical vehicles and (2) the development and implementation 

of electric vehicle recharging stations in Hawaii. A picture of an electric 

vehicle at a recharging station is shown in figure 4. RSPA plans to have 

all of the projects completed by the end of 2004. 

Figure 4: Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station
Page 23 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

• The Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information 

Technologies Program was mandated in 1998 under section 5113 of 

TEA-21. The joint program between RSPA and the National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration (NASA) began in 1999. This research program 

focuses in part on using satellite images to assess transportation 

hazards and improve disaster recovery; provide opportunities to 

monitor and evaluate regional traffic flow, including the movement of 

freight; plan for improvements in the maintenance and security of 

transportation infrastructures; and aid in transportation corridor 

planning. Figure 5 shows an example of satellite-based photography of 

interstate highways. According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA 

has also supported transportation security technology project activities 

in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. For 

instance, according to RSPA officials, the Remote Sensing Program 

reoriented two unmanned aerial vehicle projects toward monitoring for 

security as well as traditional transportation applications. RSPA has 

allocated $18 million to this research program since it began in 1999 and 

has disseminated program information; results to date have been 

disseminated through Web sites, publications,28 workshops, and 

conferences. Eighteen separate research projects constitute the 

program; 4 have been completed, and RSPA plans to complete the 

remaining 14 projects by the end of 2003.

28In April 2002, DOT and NASA issued Achievements of the DOT-NASA Joint Program on 

Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies: Application to Multimodal 

Transportation, which presented 3-year accomplishments from the program. 
Page 24 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 5: Satellite-based Photographic Image of U.S. Interstates 25 and 40 in 

Albuquerque, New Mexico 

• The Human Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management 

Program was conceived by DOT researchers and experts with the 

primary goal to develop techniques that transportation operating 

companies can employ to ensure endurance and fatigue-free 

performance of their workforces. Since fiscal year 1999, approximately 

$1 million has been allocated to the Human Centered Systems: Operator 

Fatigue Management Program. According to the Associate 

Administrator, this program has resulted in significant benefit to the 

varied DOT transportation community stakeholders. For example, in 

January 2003, the program resulted in the production of the Commercial 
Page 25 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Transportation Operator Alertness Management Handbook, which 

describes measures to better manage driver and pilot fatigue. According 

to RSPA’s Associate Administrator, this handbook has been in high 

demand by the U.S. Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration, and the 

Federal Transit Administration. Two of the four projects being 

conducted are ongoing. RSPA plans to complete the program by the end 

of 2004. In figure 6, airline pilots participate in NASA research in this 

area. 

Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in Fatigue Research
Page 26 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

• The Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program29 consists of 

assessments on four separate transportation vulnerabilities. These 

include assessing the (1) relationship between the safety and security of 

the nation’s transportation infrastructure and some of the nation’s other 

critical infrastructures, such as energy, e-commerce, banking and 

finance, and telecommunications; (2) transportation and logistical 

requirements for emergency response teams in response to terrorist 

attacks using biochemical, nuclear, and explosive weapons of mass 

destruction; (3) costs, benefits, and practicality of alternative backup 

systems for the global positioning system; and (4) trade-offs between 

the different modes of transportation and security for hazardous 

materials. Since fiscal year 2001, the Congress has appropriated $3 

million to conduct these assessments. In total, RSPA plans to publish 11 

formal reports on the four vulnerabilities being assessed and develop a 

series of presentations and workshops to further disseminate the 

information. Figure 7 shows a picture of a global positioning satellite. 

29GAO-03-502. 
Page 27 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite
Page 28 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

From fiscal years 1999 through 2003, RSPA budgeted about $37 million to 

conduct these four major multimodal research programs. Of this $37 

million, about 9 percent, or $3.3 million, came to RSPA from direct 

congressional appropriations. For example, in fiscal year 2001, the 

Congress appropriated $1 million for the Transportation Infrastructure 

Assurance Program and $300,000 for the Human Centered Systems: 

Operator Fatigue Management Program; in fiscal years 2002 and 2003, 

RSPA received an additional $1 million for the Transportation 

Infrastructure Assurance Program. The remaining $33.7 million for these 

programs was provided through reimbursable funding from other DOT 

administrations.30 Figure 8 summarizes RSPA’s annual budget for 

multimodal research from fiscal years 1999 to 2003. 

30RSPA conducts and manages its multimodal research programs, excluding the 

Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program, almost exclusively using reimbursable 

funds provided by the DOT administration sponsoring the research—that is, the Federal 

Highway Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit Administration, 

and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 
Page 29 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Figure 8: RSPA’s Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years 1999-2003) 

According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA’s current multimodal 

research programs are scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year 

2004. He added that RSPA has made budgetary and legislative proposals to 

undertake future multimodal research to, among other things, further 

examine applications of unmanned aerial vehicles for commercial remote 

sensing or examine infrastructure safety issues in hydrogen energy 

systems. He noted, however, that there are no approved plans for future 

multimodal research, pending the President’s budget proposal for the 

department and the reauthorization of TEA-21, which might affect RSPA’s 

multimodal research roles and responsibilities. 
Page 30 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA Oversees Research 

Contracts and Assesses the 

Status of Its Ongoing 

Research but Lacks a 

Systematic Process for 

Evaluating the Results of Its 

Multimodal Research 

RSPA oversees its multimodal research programs by monitoring research 

contract agreements. Specifically, the Associate Administrator said that 

RSPA assesses project progress against contractual milestones to ensure 

that the research is being completed on time and within cost, while meeting 

research objectives. He added that researchers must meet or exceed 

contractual expectations, or corrective actions are taken. These actions 

may include project cancellation. RSPA provided a recent example of the 

impact of its monitoring efforts that dealt with a project being conducted 

under its Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information 

Technologies Program. The evaluation focused on an unmanned aerial 

vehicle application to real-time traffic flow monitoring, a demonstration 

project with the Ohio Department of Transportation and several 

universities and industry partners. Due to a technical problem, the 

scheduled demonstration could not be conducted. The Remote Sensing 

Program Manager, working with the Federal Highway Administration 

Project Manager assigned to the project, pulled together a technical team 

to assess the state of the project. The technical team became convinced 

that the contractor could remedy the technical situation, allowed 3 

additional months to make the milestone, and successfully encouraged the 

project partners to cover the costs of the delay. According to the Associate 

Administrator, these actions resulted in a demonstration to a state partner 

with no cost increase to RSPA. 

In addition to providing this contractual oversight, RSPA uses the 

principles of expert or peer review through the use of multimodal and 

multiagency program oversight panels to assess the status, quality, and 

relevance of its ongoing multimodal research programs, according to the 

Associate Administrator. For example, in December 2000, TRB and RSPA 

held a conference on remote sensing and spatial information research with 

representatives from academia, transportation agencies, remote sensing 

businesses, consulting firms, and other groups. During the conference, 

participants met in breakout sessions to discuss and assess research 

progress and interim results. As we have reported, expert or peer review is
Page 31 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

a particularly effective means to evaluate federally funded research.31 The 

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy has also reported 

that expert review is widely used to evaluate the quality of current research 

as compared with other work being conducted in the field and with the 

relevance of research to the agency's goals and mission.32 However, RSPA 

has not established a process or policies for systematically using peer or 

expert reviews to evaluate the results of all its multimodal research. For 

example, RSPA has no plans to evaluate the results of its Transportation 

Infrastructure Assurance Program. 

We, among others, recognize that federal agencies that support research in 

science and engineering have been challenged to find the most useful and 

effective ways to evaluate the performance and results of the research 

programs. For example, since GPRA was passed in 1993, some questions 

have been raised about its applicability to the research activities of 

government agencies. Because the process required by GPRA is based on a 

5-year strategic planning horizon, concerns exist that GPRA constrains, and 

perhaps prohibits, the long-term thinking and planning that characterize 

the federal role in research. This concern is particularly relevant for basic 

research, but even successes from highly applied research (the type 

sponsored by DOT) can require 5 to 10 years before achieving widespread 

recognition.33 Nonetheless, as we noted in our report examining DOT 

highway research,34 without systematic program evaluation, it is unclear as 

to whether research efforts are having the intended results. Such a 

systematic approach to evaluation, according to best practices used in 

other federal research programs, includes review of all ongoing and 

completed research on a regular basis and in accordance with GPRA 

principles. 

31U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal Research: Peer Review Practices at Federal 

Science Agencies Vary, GAO/RCED-99-99 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 17, 1999) 2.

32Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Evaluating Federal Research 

Programs: Research and the Government Performance and Results Act (Washington, D.C.: 

February 1999) 39. The Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy is a joint 

committee of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and 

the Institute of Medicine. 

33Applied research is original work undertaken to develop new knowledge with a specific, 

practical application in mind.

34GAO-02-573.
Page 32 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

RSPA’s Associate Administrator acknowledged that a documented process 

for systematically evaluating the results of its multimodal research 

programs would be beneficial, but that the process should be tailored to 

match the type of research and its objectives. He added that RSPA had not 

developed and implemented a process for systematically evaluating the 

results of its multimodal research because of a lack of funding and staffing 

resources. For example, he estimated that an external evaluation to assess 

the results of its multimodal programs could cost as much as $100,000 for 

each program. Nonetheless, without establishing and implementing a 

process for systematically evaluating the results of its research, RSPA 

cannot ensure that its multimodal research programs are achieving their 

intended goals.

Conclusions To its credit, RSPA has taken steps in recent years to meet its legislative 

and department responsibilities for coordinating and overseeing the 

evaluation of the department’s transportation research activities. 

Nevertheless, ensuring that no unnecessary duplication of research 

programs occurs and that research programs—including the ones that 

RSPA conducts—are evaluated for results are critical responsibilities, 

given the importance of, and amount of money spent on, DOT research. 

Without a strategy to meet legislative and DOT requirements to coordinate 

and oversee evaluation of departmental research, RSPA may not be able to 

meet these responsibilities, particularly given its lack of authority within 

the department and resource limitations. In addition, a lack of performance 

standards against which to measure coordination efforts limits RSPA’s 

ability to identify areas where coordination is working effectively and areas 

that could be improved upon. With a strategy and performance measures in 

place, however, RSPA and DOT should be in a better position to assure the 

Congress that the department is making the most of its significant research 

dollars through effective coordination and evaluation of its research 

programs. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

To better meet legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating and 

evaluating transportation research within the department, we recommend 

the Secretary, in conjunction with RSPA’s Administrator, work with DOT 

operating administrations to: 
Page 33 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

• Develop a strategy for reviewing all DOT research projects to identify 

areas of unnecessary research duplication, overlap, and opportunities 

for joint efforts. The strategy should address time frames for 

implementing this review as well as discuss the extent to which 

finalizing the development and implementation of a DOT-wide research 

tracking system database could serve to facilitate this process. Once this 

strategy has been developed and implemented, the results of this effort 

should be incorporated in the department’s annual research plan and 

reported to the Congress on an annual basis.

• Develop and apply quantifiable performance measures to assess the 

effectiveness of research coordination efforts (once a strategy for 

review has been developed and implemented), and document the results 

of these efforts in the department’s annual research plan. These 

measures could include the number of research projects identified as 

possible candidates for joint effort or elimination and/or the associated 

reduction in the department’s research spending. 

• Develop a strategy to ensure that the results of all DOT’s transportation 

research activities are evaluated according to established best practices. 

This strategy should include estimates of the costs for ensuring that 

evaluations are completed. Once the strategy has been developed and 

implemented, the results of these efforts should be incorporated in the 

department’s annual research plan and reported to the Congress on an 

annual basis. 

• Include in the department’s annual research plan a summary of all 

research program evaluations conducted and a schedule of future 

evaluations.

In addition, we recommend that the Secretary direct RSPA’s Administrator 

to document RSPA’s process for systematically evaluating the results of its 

own multimodal research programs, and apply this process to any future 

multimodal research programs that RSPA conducts.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We obtained oral comments on a draft of this report from RSPA officials, 

including the Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and 

Education. These officials generally agreed with the contents of the draft 

report but did not comment specifically on the report’s recommendations. 

They also provided technical comments that we incorporated as 

appropriate. 
Page 34 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Regarding RSPA’s evaluation of its own multimodal research, the officials 

said that RSPA had conducted evaluation activities—peer and expert 

reviews of the progress of three of its four multimodal research programs 

and had no plans to evaluate the fourth. We acknowledge that RSPA has 

used peer and expert review to evaluate the status of at least one of its 

ongoing multimodal research programs—commercial remote sensing and 

spatial information technology—and we describe this example in this 

report. Nevertheless, we continue to believe that our recommendation for 

documenting and applying a process for systematically evaluating the 

results of any future multimodal research programs conducted by RSPA is 

warranted to ensure that such evaluations are consistently conducted in 

accordance with established best practices. 

We are sending copies of this report to congressional committees and 

subcommittees with responsibilities for transportation, the Secretary of 

Transportation, the Research and Special Programs Administration 

Administrator, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. 

We will make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the 

report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at 

http://www.gao.gov.

If you have questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-2834 

or siggerudk@gao.gov. Other key contributors were Colin Fallon, 

Christopher Keisling, Bert Japikse, Steve Morris, and Jason Schwartz.

Katherine Siggerud

Acting Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues
Page 35 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Apendxies

Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA ApendxiI

Table 2: Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders

Model Park Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Boston Edison FTA

Hybrid School Bus Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Solectria FTA

Extended Hybrid Electric Heavy Duty Vehicle 

Emission Test Certification

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/MJ Bradley FTA

Jet Vapor Deposition for Catalyzing Fuel Cell 

Membranes

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Jet Process 

Corporation

FTA

AV 900 Cycler for a 600-900 Volt System for Heavy 

Duty Hybrid Electric Vehicles

Electricore/Allison Transmission Division of General Motors 

Corporation

FTA

Installation of Capstone Microturbines into AVS 

Passenger Trams

Electricore/Advanced Vehicle Systems, Inc. FTA

Novel Silicon Carbide JFET-Gated Thyristor Electricore/Rutgers University FTA

Electric Vehicle Ready State Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA

Zero Emission 100-Passenger Electric Tram for 

Airports

Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/U.S. 

Electricar

FTA, FAA

Battery Life Cycle Prediction Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/Hawaii 

Natural Energy Institute/University of Hawaii/SOEST

FTA

Extension of the Hybrid Electric HMMWV Power 

Train Development Program

Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation/PEI 

Electronics

FTA

Optimization of Hybrid Electric Vehicles 

Compression Ignition Auxiliary Unit Control Strategy 

for Emissions Reduction and Improved Fuel 

Economy

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/Navistar International Transportation Corporation

FTA

Integrated Simulation and Testing System for 

Electric Vehicle Batteries

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/Pennsylvania Transportation Institute

FTA

Smaller Better Inverters with Polymer Multi-Layer 

Capacitors

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/Sigma Technologies International, Inc.

FTA

NiMH Battery System Development for an Electric 

Vehicle Bus

Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Ovonic Battery FTA

Advanced PLI Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Compact Power FTA

Reliable Electric Propulsion System for Medium and 

Heavy Duty Vehicles

CALSTART/Santa Barbara Electric Bus Works FTA

All-Purpose Electric Tractor CALSTART/ISE Research Corporation FTA, FAA

Development of Advanced Electrochemical 

Capacitors Using Carbon and Lead-Oxide 

Electrodes for Hybrid Vehicle Applications

CALSTART/University of California, Davis FTA

Hybrid Transit Bus with Flywheel CALSTART/Trinity Flywheel Power FTA

Auxiliary Power Unit Project Using Fuel Cell 

Technology

CALSTART/Freightliner Corporation FTA
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 36 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Caterpillar Heavy Duty Powertrain Applicable to 

Heavy Duty Machines

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium FTA

Design/Integrate/Test Auxiliary Power Units/Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles for Deployment in Commercial 

Delivery Fleet

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium FTA

Low Cost, Modular, Highly Reliable, Universal 

Propulsion Inverter for Heavy-Duty Commercial and 

Military Hybrid Vehicles

Electricore FTA

Design and Fabrication of 4H-SiC Hybrid JBS 

Diode for High Temperature and High Efficiency 

Inverters for Medium and Heavy Duty Applications

Electricore/Rutgers University FTA

Electric Vehicle Ready State (Phase II) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA

Hybrid Drive System for Heavy Duty Transit Buses 

and Trucks (Phase I)

Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/Hawaii 

Technology Development Corporation

FTA

Georgia 1 - Design, Manufacture and Test a Low 

Speed Industrial Motor System in Heavy-Duty 

Vehicles

Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation FTA

Texas 1 - Enhanced Safety and Risk Reduction for 

University of Texas Demonstration Program

Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation FTA

Simulation and Field Test Hybrid Ultra-Capacitor 

Battery Energy Storage System for Electric Transit 

Vehicles

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/Pennsylvania Transportation Institute

FTA

Development of Scalable Direct-Methanol Fuel Cell 

Stacks

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/GATE Center for Advanced Energy Storage

FTA

Zebra Battery Demonstration in an Electric School 

Bus

Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Santa Barbara Electric 

Bus Works

FTA

Fuel Cell Auxiliary Power Unit Demonstration in a 

Heavy-Duty Truck

Sacramento Municipal Utility District/ISE Research 

Corporation

FTA

DOT Center for Climate Change and Environmental 

Forecasting Conference Support

CALSTART/WestStart Corporation All modes

Hybrid Electric Prototype Truck, Phase II Program CALSTART/ISE Research Corporation FTA

150 kW Traction Drive/Hybrid Auxiliary Power Unit 

System for Large Electric or Hybrid Electric Vehicle 

Applications

CALSTART/Unique Mobility, Inc. FTA

Hickam Air Force Base Project Development Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force

Rapid Chargers Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force 

Electric Bus Conversion Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force

U.S.S. Arizona Memorial Tour Boat Study Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Navy, National 

Park Service

(Continued From Previous Page)

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 37 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Source: RSPA.

Legend

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

Note: This program is performed in partnership with seven major consortia consisting of (1) 

Sacramento Electric Transportation Consortium; (2) Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; (3) 

CALSTART-WESTSTART; (4) Electricore, Inc.; (5) Mid-Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles; (6) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; and (7) Southern Coalition for Advanced 

Transportation.

Advanced Vehicles for Great Smoky Mountains 

National Park

Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced 

Vehicles/Electric Power Research Institute

FTA, National Park 

Service

Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles Energy Control System Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced Vehicles FTA

Phase I Fast Track Fuel Cell Bus Project Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Sacramento Electric 

Transportation Consortium/CALSTART/WestStart

FTA

Development of NiMH Battery System for 

Application in Heavy Duty Hybrid Electric Vehicles

Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Sacramento Electric 

Transportation Consortium

FTA

Lightweight Hybrid Electric Transit Bus Program CALSTART/NOVA Bus Incorporated FTA

Airport Clean Fuel Vehicle Outreach -- Targeted 

Project Development

CALSTART/WestStart Corporation FTA, FAA

Phase I, Fast Track Fuel Cell Bus Project CALSTART/WestStart/Sacramento Electric Transportation 

Consortium

FTA

National Conference on Climate Change Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium All modes

Development and Fabrication of a PEM Fuel Cell 

Power Plant for Heavy Duty Vehicle Applications

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/University 

Transportation Centers Fuel Cells

FTA

Drive Line Development Team and Industry Work 

Group

Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium FTA

Route-Ready Fuel Cell Component Testing Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Concurrent 

Technologies Corporation

FTA

Hybrid Electric Bus (Phase II) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force 

Multi-Vehicle Charging System Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force

Data Acquisition Systems Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force

Aircraft Loader Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of 

the Air Force

(Continued From Previous Page)

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 38 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies Program

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders

Airborne Sensor Fusion: A Fast-Track Approach to 

National Environmental Policy Act Streamlining and 

Environmental Assessment

NCRST-E/Earthdata Int'l of NC FHWA

Remote Sensing of Environmental Parameters for 

Use in National Environmental Policy Act 

Documentation in Support of Highway Corridor 

Studies

NCRST-E/ICF Consulting FHWA

Remote Sensing Applications in Transit NCRST-F/Bridgewater State College FHWA, FTA

Airborne Ground-Penetrating Radar to Support 

Monitoring of Pipeline Safety and Performance

NCRST-H/Aeris Inc. RSPA/Office of 

Pipeline Safety

Environmental Impact and Risk Modeling of 

Petroleum and Gas Transmission Lines Using 

Interferometry and High Resolution Imagery from 

Satellite and Airborne-based Remote Sensing 

Systems

NCRST-H/EarthWatch, Inc. RSPA/Office of 

Pipeline Safety

Facilitating the Operation Efficiency and Growth of 

Intermodal Freight Traffic: Application of Remote 

Sensing Technology to the Alameda Corridor, Los 

Angeles, CA

NCRST-I/ASL Consulting Engineers (Tetra Tech Corp.) Office of the 

Secretary of 

Transportation/

Office of 

Intermodalism

Remote Sensing Applications Supporting Regional 

Database for Transportation Planning

NCRST-F/Veridian System Division (formerly Veridian 

ERIM)

FHWA, FTA

Road Network Planning Tool NCRST-F/Technology Service Corp. FHWA

Impact of Instant Imagery Access on a Regional 

Database for Transportation Planning

NCRST-I/Orbimage FHWA

Development of Regional Databases for 

Transportation Planning

NCRST-E/Veridian Systems Division FHWA, FTA

Remote Sensing for Airport Development and 

Transportation Planning

NCRST-F/Grafton Technologies, Inc. FAA, FHWA

Remote Sensing of Invasive Aquatic Plant 

Obstruction in Navigable Waterways

NCRST-F/TerraMetrics, Inc. MARAD

Using an Unmanned Airborne Data Acquisition 

System (ADAS) for Traffic Surveillance, Monitoring, 

and Management

NCRST-F/GeoData Systems, Inc. FHWA

The Application of Remote Sensing

Technologies in Post-Disaster Damage

Assessment

NCRST-H/ImageCat, Inc. All modes

Long-Term Monitoring of Changes in Transportation 

and Land Use Associated with the Central 

Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel in Boston, MA.

NCRST-I/University of Massachusetts FHWA
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 39 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Source: RSPA.

Legend

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FRA Federal Railroad Administration 

FTA Federal Transit Administration

MARAD Maritime Administration 

RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration 

Note: This program is performed in partnership with four major consortia consisting of (1) the National 

Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Environmental Assessment/Application (NCRST-E); 

(2) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Traffic Flow (NCRST-F); (3) the 

National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Safety, Hazards, and Disasters (NCRST-H); 

and (4) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Infrastructure Management 

(NCRST-I).

Implementing Remote Sensing Applications to 

Develop and Environmental Impact Statement and 

Decision Options to Relocate the Current CSX 

Railroad from Mississippi Gulf Coast townships to 

the I-10 Right of Way 

NCRST-E/FHWA/Mississippi Department of Transportation FHWA, FRA

Remote Sensing Applications for

Environmental Analysis in Transportation

Planning

NCRST-E/Washington State Department of Transportation FHWA

Highway Features and Characteristics Database 

Development Using Commercial Remote Sensing 

Technology, Combined with Mobile Mapping, GIS 

and GPS.

NCRST-I/Florida Department of Transportation FHWA

(Continued From Previous Page)

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 40 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Table 4: Human-Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program

Source: RSPA.

Legend

DOT Department of Transportation

Project title Project performer(s)

Project 

stakeholders

Framework for Multimodal Synthesis and Cost 

Benefit Analyses

ORC Macro All DOT modes 

through the Human 

Factors Coordinating 

Committee 

Work Schedule Representation Analysis Software XIMES GmbH All DOT modes 

through the Human 

Factors Coordinating 

Committee

Development of a Fatigue Management Reference 

Handbook

Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Operations All DOT modes 

through the Human 

Factors Coordinating 

Committee

Fatigue Analysis Systems for Transportation 

Operations: Railroad Applications

Science Applications International Corporation All DOT modes 

through the Human 

Factors Coordinating 

Committee
Appendix I

Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in 

the Four Multimodal Programs Conducted by 

RSPA 

Page 41 GAO-03-500 Transportation Research

Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program

Source: RSPA.

Legend

DOT Department of Transportation

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

FRA Federal Railroad Administration 

MARAD Maritime Administration 

RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration 

TRB Transportation Research Board

TSA Transportation Security Administration

USCG United States Coast Guard

Project title Project performer(s) Project stakeholders

Interdependency of the Transportation System with 

Other Critical Infrastructures

Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center

Office of Intelligence and Security, TSA, FAA, 

Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, TRB. 

Transportation and Logistical Requirements for 

Emergency Response Teams in Dealing with Weapons 

of Mass Destruction

Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center 

DOT Maritime Academy, FAA, Federal 

Emergency Management Adminstration, 

FHWA, MARAD, RSPA’s Office of Emergency 

Transportation.

Feasibility of Alternative Backup Systems for the 

Global Positioning System

Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center

Booz-Allen Hamilton, DOT Office of the 

Secretary, FAA, FRA, Northrop-Grumman, 

USCG. 

Options to Transition Hazardous Materials 

Transportation Security Guidelines to Security 

Requirements

Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center

TSA, American Association of Railroads, 

American Chemistry Council, Bureau of 

Transportation Statistics, DOT Office of the 

Secretary, FMCSA, FRA, GAO, TRB, RSPA’s 

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, RSPA’s 

Office of Pipeline Safety, and USCG, 

American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 

the National Transportation Safety Board, the 

Inland Rivers, Ports and Waterways 

Association, the Bureau of the Census, the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Vanderbilt 

University.

(542013)
GAO’s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government 

for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal 

programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other 

assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 

decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this 

list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to GAO 

Mailing Lists” under “Order GAO Products” heading.

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A check 

or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO 

also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single 

address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Public Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548

United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested

Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00